Author
Topic: No 7D Mark II? [CR1] (Read 61084 times)

If the 5DIII really does come in at or near $3,000 (which I think it probably will), that just gives Canon much more room to play in the enthusiast-semiprofessional-professional APS-C market. Possibly a 70D, 7DII and a 7DX?

Awinphoto, I agree that there is no urgency for a 7DII. I'd rather see a major leap forward instead of incremental changes and if I have to wait a bit for that, that's fine. Absolutely nothing wrong with the 7D as it stands. I do think, however, that it is unlikely they'll want to let Photokina pass by without a major body announcement and if the 5DIII gets announced within the next month, the next logical choice is the 7D.

It does seem like a lot of people want a full frame body for the price of an APS-C. I wonder if they expect Canon to throw in a free miniature unicorn as well. I suspect many of those who think APS-C is inferior will change their tune if the entry-level full frame goes to $3,000.

JonJT

This forum has a serious problem conflating the needs and wants of crop shooters and FF shooters.

The 7D is not a stop-gap camera for those who cannot afford a FF in the interim (at least, not in terms of design and market placement). Some people need and want an APS-C and have no intention to move up to a FF, for whatever reason. Everyone needs to respect their desires, especially Canon.

Pixel peeping is not a useful way to compare the image quality of two different cameras. You MUST take intended viewing enlargement and distance into account. Otherwise, any comparison is meaningless. Having said that, though, I do believe Canon's current APS-C sensor is indeed worse than their FF counterpart and, certainly worse than Nikon's offerings. But, that is not necessarily something that all shooters cannot tolerate.

Canon would be absolutely negligent and positively moronic not to follow up the 7D with a superior offering. They need to provide Canon shooters with something that has, at least, comparable build quality, a comparable feature set, improved AF performance and a better sensor. Canon would be commuting APS-C suicide if they didn't. I don't care what it is called, so long as they make the damn camera.

Therefore, I will remain ambivalent about this rumor, if only because its implications have no effect upon the future of Canon's "King of the Crops" offering. Let me know when either, Canonrumors.com has a credible source for a spec list for the 7Ds spiritual successor or, has a credible source that says that Canon will no longer occupy the $1600-$2000 crop body market. I HIGHLY doubt the latter will come to fruition. But, if it does, I'll either switch to Nikon, buy a 7D and just be content, or just commit Seppuku and call it a day.

If the 5DIII really does come in at or near $3,000 (which I think it probably will), that just gives Canon much more room to play in the enthusiast-semiprofessional-professional APS-C market. Possibly a 70D, 7DII and a 7DX?

Awinphoto, I agree that there is no urgency for a 7DII. I'd rather see a major leap forward instead of incremental changes and if I have to wait a bit for that, that's fine. Absolutely nothing wrong with the 7D as it stands. I do think, however, that it is unlikely they'll want to let Photokina pass by without a major body announcement and if the 5DIII gets announced within the next month, the next logical choice is the 7D.

It does seem like a lot of people want a full frame body for the price of an APS-C. I wonder if they expect Canon to throw in a free miniature unicorn as well. I suspect many of those who think APS-C is inferior will change their tune if the entry-level full frame goes to $3,000.

well shoot at that price point they could add a programmable tv remote and a coffee maker into the next camera, haha. I think with the anticipation and hype of the new 5d3 and the implications of the new Full Frame, that coupled with the 1dx, could carry Canon throughout the calendar year as far as sales and media hype. I feel much like the 7d original was, it's going to be more market driven than out of life cycle. If the market demands it and if there's stiff competition against the 7d, then you could see canon come out with a new Juggernaut of a camera, but have a feeling it will be early next year, but i could be wrong.

Now 5D2 focus, shutter lag, shutter noise, these are other issue altogether... the 7D is a real upgrade in each of these, which is why a FF 5D/7D merge makes so much sense!

I can't say I really understand this at all. Why does the 7D line need to be deleted in order to improve the next 5D? Surely it would make more sense to just... improve the next 5D. I don't see how certain features in the 7D line precludes them from being in any future 5D. Most of these features are simply because the camera is newer.

I see it as this... To make improvements, really solid improvements to the 7D, it likely should push it closer to the 2000 - 2200 range... Even as so, with the sensor side being so close, and if the next 5D does get higher FPS and AF, then it becomes the question of is it worth Canon having a $3K FF and a $2K or so crop that are pretty much identical other then one is crop and one is FF...

At the same time below it you have an $800 or so xxxD series Mid Consumer level camera and I imagine the 70D become more of a $1200 body and gets an upgrade.

And really... while the 10-22 is a great lens, the 17-40 is pretty much a swap both in price and maybe a slight step down in IQ, but not by much.

It costs money to produce and manufacture individual lines of lenses, especially if there is a smaller market. Makes a lot of sense to me for Canon to promote Pro bodies with Pro lenses the L series, have general purpose mid level EF lenses, and then have some more specific EF-S lenses to fill out the crop line.

I really don't think you will see Pro Level EF-S lenses, and while there are a few good ones out there, makes more sense to produce lenses someone can grow into and continue than to have to sell off when you upgrade.

Now 5D2 focus, shutter lag, shutter noise, these are other issue altogether... the 7D is a real upgrade in each of these, which is why a FF 5D/7D merge makes so much sense!

I can't say I really understand this at all. Why does the 7D line need to be deleted in order to improve the next 5D? Surely it would make more sense to just... improve the next 5D. I don't see how certain features in the 7D line precludes them from being in any future 5D. Most of these features are simply because the camera is newer.

I see it as this... To make improvements, really solid improvements to the 7D, it likely should push it closer to the 2000 - 2200 range... Even as so, with the sensor side being so close, and if the next 5D does get higher FPS and AF, then it becomes the question of is it worth Canon having a $3K FF and a $2K or so crop that are pretty much identical other then one is crop and one is FF...

At the same time below it you have an $800 or so xxxD series Mid Consumer level camera and I imagine the 70D become more of a $1200 body and gets an upgrade.

And really... while the 10-22 is a great lens, the 17-40 is pretty much a swap both in price and maybe a slight step down in IQ, but not by much.

It costs money to produce and manufacture individual lines of lenses, especially if there is a smaller market. Makes a lot of sense to me for Canon to promote Pro bodies with Pro lenses the L series, have general purpose mid level EF lenses, and then have some more specific EF-S lenses to fill out the crop line.

I really don't think you will see Pro Level EF-S lenses, and while there are a few good ones out there, makes more sense to produce lenses someone can grow into and continue than to have to sell off when you upgrade.

You are assuming that everyone who shoots a Canon DSLR intends to move up to FF at some point. That is not necessarily true. I wish Canon knew this. I'd LOVE LOVE LOVE to have a 17-55 with L build quality and weather sealing.

Although, perhaps Canon doesn't care. Maybe they don't want to turn the APS-C standard into a fully featured system with every equivalent option, except sensor size.

but i really dont see how they can maintain both the 60D line and the 7D line.. it just doesnt make much sense. i do like the crop factor.. but there is no reason to have two brands so close together in terms of performance and price.

I see it as this... To make improvements, really solid improvements to the 7D, it likely should push it closer to the 2000 - 2200 range... Even as so, with the sensor side being so close, and if the next 5D does get higher FPS and AF, then it becomes the question of is it worth Canon having a $3K FF and a $2K or so crop that are pretty much identical other then one is crop and one is FF...

Nikon has been doing this with the D300s and the D700 with no hitches... minor differences in AF, speed, etc but one was FF and the other crop. The D300 is the exact reason that spurred the 7D... Having one as crop, one a full frame, with the 5d being as good if not slightly better to justify the premium in price and you're good to go.

And really... while the 10-22 is a great lens, the 17-40 is pretty much a swap both in price and maybe a slight step down in IQ, but not by much.

It costs money to produce and manufacture individual lines of lenses, especially if there is a smaller market. Makes a lot of sense to me for Canon to promote Pro bodies with Pro lenses the L series, have general purpose mid level EF lenses, and then have some more specific EF-S lenses to fill out the crop line.

I wouldn't say the 17-40 is a downgrade in IQ, personally... some say it's soft on corners on full frame cameras but I shot an interior glamor aircraft shot of a private charter company with it and the 5d and it was as good if not better than the 10-22 was on my crop cameras when I had it. It was printed at 19x13 and even at the extreme corners you can see the weaves of the fabric on the aircraft walls, threads in the carpet, crisp highlight detail glimmering off the wood. anywho, as you said, canon has put a lot of money into marketing EF-S lenses and those heavily invested in that glass wont want to part with them to go up to a 5d or 1D and pay a few thousand more just on glass to replace the lenses the cannot use anymore. I dont see the 7D as being one and done. I just also dont see a replacement any time soon

Will we? Both 70D and 5D Mk III are only rumors. We don't know the specs, we don't know their names and we don't know the prices.

7D: $ 1499 5D Mk II: $ 2399

If the 5D Mk III (or 5D X) will cost around $ 2999, most likely the price of successor of the 7D will be considerably higher as well, leaving enough room for a camera between it and the rebel line. That's why I don't believe the rumor that the xxD line of cameras will be dropped or that a 70D will replace the 7D.

Will we? Both 70D and 5D Mk III are only rumors. We don't know the specs, we don't know their names and we don't know the prices.

7D: $ 1499 5D Mk II: $ 2399

If the 5D Mk III (or 5D X) will cost around $ 2999, most likely the price of successor of the 7D will be considerably higher as well, leaving enough room for a camera between it and the rebel line. That's why I don't believe the rumor that the xxD line of cameras will be dropped or that a 70D will replace the 7D.

Price won't really matter. Sure, if you priced the 7D successor at 2K and had the next closest APS-C at 800, you could stick another body in there around 1300 or 1400 but, if the feature set isn't rightly between those two bodies, Canon would be wasting their money and would do damage to their market share.

Will we? Both 70D and 5D Mk III are only rumors. We don't know the specs, we don't know their names and we don't know the prices.

7D: $ 1499 5D Mk II: $ 2399

If the 5D Mk III (or 5D X) will cost around $ 2999, most likely the price of successor of the 7D will be considerably higher as well, leaving enough room for a camera between it and the rebel line. That's why I don't believe the rumor that the xxD line of cameras will be dropped or that a 70D will replace the 7D.

Price won't really matter. Sure, if you priced the 7D successor at 2K and had the next closest APS-C at 800, you could stick another body in there around 1300 or 1400 but, if the feature set isn't rightly between those two bodies, Canon would be wasting their money and would do damage to their market share.

The main difference between the 600D, 60D and the 7D is the AF, the number of cross-type sensors, fps, size of the viewfinder etc. IMO there are enough features to differentiate between those three products lines (consume, prosumer, pro).

I should know as I own two 5DMarkII's and a 7D. I bought the 7D thinking it would be close to the 5D in image quality, or at least in the same ballpark. I was excited by its features and thought I could live with a small drop in IQ for the sake of all those other goodies. Unfortunately it's not even close.

I get so beyond tired of this nonsense. I have made 24" prints from the two cameras and posted 100% crops online, and in both cases asked viewers to tell me which came from which camera. Note that I did not show them labeled views, but unlabeled ones. Not once has any viewer successfully done this. Over a dozen print views and well past a hundred online views and not one person could even guess correctly.

At high ISO, there's a difference. At low to mid ISO they're not only close, they're so close that it's impossible to tell them apart in a real test. I regularly make large prints and I consider paper choice to have a greater impact on final IQ than the choice between these two sensors.

If you show a human being two identical prints...same exact image...and tell them one came from a model A camera but one came from a much better model B camera, the average viewer will tell you they see the difference and the B print is much better even though the prints are identical. Some will even go into great detail as to why B is better! This is human nature. It's the inescapable way our brains are wired. The true test is to show unlabeled images and ask which, if any, is better, or if they are the same. And guess what happens in those tests...

Quote

1. You have a fantastically featured awesome little camera with great autofocus, button layout, flash trigger capabilities, weather sealing, responsiveness...yadda yadda yadda.... but with a horrible sensor

The sensor is fantastic and is better for those in focal length limited situations.

Quote

That lineup is just whack and they should really do a sensor swap. Canon will address this by putting crop sensors solely back into the XXD line with the 70D, and boosting the features of the 5DmarkIII so they meet or surpass the 7D - guaranteed. Well shots per second *might* be down a bit, and there will be no onboard flash but these are the only exceptions I can think of).

That and pixels on target. I use a 7D heavily for sports photography, and I do not want to sacrifice the crop factor or a single frame per second. I have numerous 24" prints that involved more cropping with a final image size of 9-10 MP. On a 5D2 or a theoretical 5D3 at 22 MP I would have ended up with 3-4 MP, not enough for the print.

Canon needs a pro crop body geared for sports. The 7D basically filled that role. Perhaps a 70D would as well, but my fear is that they would cripple it somehow to make it clearly lower in the lineup than the 5D3. Which would put us back to the days when Nikon had the only pro crop body.

A 61pt AF 22 MP 5D3 will compete against the 1Dx, but not the D800. I can tell you right now if Canon doesn't have an answer for the D800 this year at a comparable price point, I will have a D800. The 5D2 was successful because it was squarely targeted at wedding/portrait/landscape/studio work with 21 MP and high quality video at a much lower cost than Nikon's 25 MP body. Now Nikon is offering those users 36 MP at a comparable price point, and I know one pro wedding photographer who has already ordered one even though most of his current equipment is Canon.

Put simply, for sports work I want fast frame rates and crop because I'm typically FL limited. For landscapes I want MP, MP, MP. Canon could possibly fill both roles with a FF body that offered 8 fps and 35 MP or more (more would be better). But if they do that at the D800 price point, then what's the point of the 1Dx?

Quote

If your 7D ego has just been bruised then I suggest you get yourself a full frame camera and start pixel peeping and see the "full frame light" my friend

Been there, done that, didn't see the light, and neither can anyone else when put to the test. I hate pixel peepers any way. I make prints. I don't sit in a dark room all night studying images for flaws at 400%.

Why? It won't have the high ISO of FF nor the crop advantage of 1.6x. And it can't use the excellent, low cost UWA zooms available for crop. I think I would purposely ignore an APS-H body at this point.

If your 7D ego has just been bruised then I suggest you get yourself a full frame camera and start pixel peeping and see the "full frame light" my friend

Been there, done that, didn't see the light, and neither can anyone else when put to the test. I hate pixel peepers any way. I make prints. I don't sit in a dark room all night studying images for flaws at 400%.

Price won't really matter. Sure, if you priced the 7D successor at 2K and had the next closest APS-C at 800, you could stick another body in there around 1300 or 1400 but, if the feature set isn't rightly between those two bodies, Canon would be wasting their money and would do damage to their market share.

Ah, yes. The old problem of product differentiation and converging technology. As technology improves, the perceivable differences between products shrink. All of the camera manufacturers are facing this dilemma. It's got to be real hell for them to try find ways to meet consumer demand, while simultaneously finding the right mixture of features for each product. One mistake and you've undercut your product line.

Good news is we consumers win because the products get better. Bad news is the price tags keep going up.

aloper

Actually, not providing a follow up to the 7D does make sense if you think about a mirrorless camera coming soon...Remove the 7D from the high end and move everything up below it up one notch and now you have room at the lower to mid price range for a mirrorless camera...